What do you do if your Systems Design ideas are met with criticism?

Identify who is providing the criticism (e.g., stakeholders, team members, or external reviewers) and their level of expertise or authority. Determine whether the criticism is constructive feedback aimed at improving your ideas or if it is based on personal preferences or biases. Assess whether the criticism is specific and actionable or if it is vague and unsubstantiated. Consider the context and motivation behind the criticism to better understand its significance.

Handling criticism of your system design ideas requires a strategic and empathetic approach. Start by embracing intellectual humility, fostering an environment where collaboration is encouraged, and practicing empathy mapping to understand critics' perspectives. Apply design thinking principles to address criticism constructively and facilitate design sprints for intensive refinement. Promote radical candor and celebrate failures as opportunities for growth, all while ensuring psychological safety within your team. By implementing these steps, you can effectively navigate criticism and enhance your system design process.

In my professional life, ideas and initiatives have always been and will always be subjected to criticism and evaluation. I see these moments as great opportunities for my growth and improvement because it is always important to listen carefully to criticism, analyze it objectively and adapt my strategies for success, to create an environment where ideas grow, and learning is continuous through I highly value people's opinions and perspectives, listening carefully to their concerns and suggestions, distinguishing between constructive and merely negative ones. Adaptation is fundamental, so I remain willing to recognize areas in which I can improve, making the necessary adjustments to strengthen ideas and strategies. Gratitude to all.

That’s true also if someone only are criticising you because they want to hurt your confidence. When you openly appreciate it you will not get hurt and they will learn that these things are not working out.

1. I first try to figure out the reason for the criticism and address any valid objection through review and correction. 2. If opposition still remains, I proceed to bring elements of proof to the design's validity through real-life case study and possibly prototyping. 3. I try to rally and win the understanding of forward-thinking thought leaders, who might have more sway than me on the dissenters. 4. I welcome any additional suggestion, thought or contribution that might improve the relevance, simplicity, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of my original design and get their authors on board.

Not all of the criticisms is worth documenting. Pick something that will be really useful for your project. Don’t put everything because then good feedback will loose power and leverage to make change.

it's important to approach the feedback constructively. Context: A tech company planning to upgrade its database system. Engineer: "I propose we switch to a microservices architecture for better scalability." Manager: "I'm concerned about the increased complexity and overhead. Can you justify the benefits?" Engineer: "Certainly. Microservices can improve our deployment cycles and allow for better fault isolation. Here’s how we can mitigate the complexity..." Key Actions: Listen: Understand the specific concerns raised Clarify: Provide data or examples to address the concerns. Collaborate: Open the floor to suggestions, showing you value team input Outcome: The dialogue fosters a constructive review of the proposal